This article was downloaded by: [University of Waterloo]
On: 11 October 2014, At: 06:11
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Desalination and Water Treatment
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tdwt20
A review on sugar industry wastewater: sources,
treatment technologies, and reuse
Jai Prakash Kushwaha
a
a
Department of Chemical Engineering , Thapar University , Patiala , Punjab , India Phone:
Tel. +91 175 2393388 Fax: Tel. +91 175 2393388
Published online: 20 Sep 2013.
To cite this article: Jai Prakash Kushwaha (2013): A review on sugar industry wastewater: sources, treatment technologies,
and reuse, Desalination and Water Treatment, DOI: 10.1080/19443994.2013.838526
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2013.838526
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
(2013) 1–10
Desalination and Water Treatment
www.deswater.com
doi: 10.1080/19443994.2013.838526
A review on sugar industry wastewater: sources, treatment
technologies, and reuse
Jai Prakash Kushwaha
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
Department of Chemical Engineering, Thapar University, Patiala, Punjab, India
Tel. +91 175 2393388; Fax: +91 175 2393005; email: jps_kag@yahoo.co.in
Received 13 June 2013; Accepted 20 August 2013
ABSTRACT
Sugar industries have an important place in the Indian economic development. However, the
wastewater generated from these industries bear a high degree of pollution load. Sugar
industries in India generate about 1,000 L of wastewater for one ton of sugar cane crushed.
Wastewater from sugar industry, if discharged without treatment, poses pollution problems
in both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. In this review, the sugar industry wastewater
generation sources, characteristics, recent advancements in the aerobic, anaerobic, and
physico-chemical treatment technologies, and the areas needing further research have been
explored. Possibility of treated wastewater reuse was also investigated. Most of the research
work for sugar industry wastewater treatments has been carried out by anaerobic treatment
processes. However, oil and grease are not easily degraded by anaerobic processes. Also, an
anaerobic process partly degrades nutrients whereas, aerobic processes consume higher
energy. Anaerobic-aerobic combined systems can remove organics completely. Unfortunately,
very few studies are available for anaerobic-aerobic combined systems, and more work is
needed in this field.
Keywords: Sugar industry; Wastewater sources and characteristics; Aerobic treatment;
Anaerobic treatment; Physico-chemical treatment
1. Introduction
India is the world’s largest sugar-consuming country and the second largest in terms of sugar production.
The growth of sugar factories along with the sugar
industries segment depicts the sugar industry scenario
in India [1]. Cane cultivation areas increased to
5,086,000 hectares in 2011–2012, which were 5,055,000
hectares in 2007–2008. Moreover, there were 516 industries in operation in 2007–2008. Currently, in 2011–2012,
this figure increased to 529, producing 26.0 million tons
of sugar [2]. Consequently, the amount of wastewater
generated from these industries has also increased.
Sugar industries wastewaters are characterized by
high biological oxygen demand (BOD), chemical
oxygen demand (COD), and total dissolve solids.
Wastewater from sugar industry generally contains
carbohydrates, nutrients, oil and grease, chlorides,
sulfates, and heavy metals [3–6].
The sugar industries have important place in the
Indian economic development. However, the wastewater generated from these industries bears high
degree of pollution load. Wastewater from sugar
industry, if discharged without treatment, poses
pollution problem in both aquatic and terrestrial
1944-3994/1944-3986 Ó 2013 Balaban Desalination Publications. All rights reserved.
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
2
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
ecosystems [7]. Also, sugar industry wastewater when
not treated completely produces unpleasant smell
when released into the environment. Moreover, Indian
government imposed very strict rules and regulations
for the effluent discharge to protect the environment
(Table 1). Therefore, suitable treatment methods are
required to meet the effluent discharge standards.
Primary treatment of sugar industry wastewater
includes filtration, sedimentation, and load equalization [8,9]. Whereas, secondary treatments are biological methods like lagoons [10–12], aerated ponds [10],
up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB), expanded
granular sludge blanket, fluidized bed reactor (FBR)
[13,5]. Sometimes combined anaerobic and aerobic
treatments are also used for sugar industry wastewater treatment [10,14].
In this review, the sugar industry wastewater
generation sources, their characteristics, recent
advancements in the aerobic, anaerobic, and physicochemical treatment technologies, and the areas in which
further research is needed have been identified.
Possibility of treated wastewater reuse was also
investigated.
2. Process, wastewater sources, and characteristics
Processing steps involved in production of sugar
are milling, clarification, evaporation, crystallization,
and centrifugation. In milling process, sugar cane is
crushed to extract juice. During milling process, some
amount of water is added to crushing cane, known as
imbibition water, to increase the efficiency of juice
extraction [15]. After extraction of juice, fibrous residue, which is known as bagasse, is generally utilized
as fuel for boiler after drying. The extracted juice is
very turbid and greenish in color, which is then
clarified and bleached with Ca(OH)2 and SO2 dosing
followed with clarification by continuous clarifier. The
clear juice is decanted, and thickened sludge is send
to the rotary drum vacuum filter for the recovery of
remaining juice contained in sludge. Here, in this
filtration process, water is added to enhance the efficiency of process, and the dewatered sludge known as
press mud is discarded and utilized as fertilizer. The
clear juice is then send to vacuum multiple-effect
evaporators, where juice is concentrated. Afterwards,
sucrose crystallization is carried out using pans where
the remaining water is evaporated under vacuum.
Product leaving the vacuum pans is called massecuite,
which is then centrifuged, washed, dried, screened,
and packaged [16].
In view of generated wastewater volume and
characteristics, sugar industries are one of the most
polluting industries. Volume of effluent generated
depends on the cane crushing capacity of industry
and management of water [16]. Sugar industries in
India generate about 1,000 L of wastewater for one ton
of sugar cane processed [17]. Therefore, the sugar
industry having the capacity of 2,500 tons crushed per
day (TCD) will generate about 450 106 L of wastewater in a running session of six months. It has also been
reported that Mexican sugar industries generates
45.9 m3/s wastewater (713.83 106 m3) for six months
running session [18].
Sugar industry wastewaters are produced mainly
by cleaning operations. Washing of milling house
floor, various division of boiling house like evaporators, clarifiers, vacuum pans, centrifugation, etc.
generates huge volume of wastewater. Also, wash
water used for filter cloth of rotary vacuum filter and
periodical cleaning of lime water and SO2 producing
house becomes a part of wastewater. Periodical cleaning of heat exchangers and evaporators with NaOH
and HCl to remove the scales on the tube surface
Table 1
Minimal standards for discharge of effluents from the sugar industry
Parameter
pH
BOD3
COD
Total suspended solids
Oil and grease
Total nitrogen
Total phosphorus
Temperature
a
Maximum value (mg/L)
World bank guidlinea
CPCB, Indiab
6–9
–
150–250
50
10
–
–
63˚C increase
–
100 for disposal on land, 30 for disposal in surface water
–
100 for disposal on land, 30 for disposal in surface water
10
–
–
–
World Bank [8]. bhttp://cpcb.nic.in/Industry-Specific-Standards/Effluent/411.pdf
[23]
[27]
[5]
[61]
[62]
[19]
[22]
[63]
[17]
[20]
BSI: beet sugar industry; CSI: cane sugar industry; SBS: synthetic beet sugar wastewater; SR: sugar refinery. aoil = 23 mg/L; boil and grease = 118 mg/L.
48–559
–
–
1,043
195
–
–
–
–
3,195
–
–
906
441
100
–
–
–
–
2,460 (CaCO3)
3
–
5
3
–
–
12
–
1–3 (P)
–
335 ± 7
–
–
–
–
–
654
–
173–2,190
–
–
4,641–5,103
–
3,837
–
60–1820
3,163
–
350–2,750
3,131
6,621 ± 113
8,339–9,033
6,300
6,513
2,731
110–3,400
7,568
3,382
1,000–4,340
12,211
BSI
CSI
SBS
BSI
SR
CSIa
CSIb
BSI
CSI
CSI
7
7
–
8
–
6–10
4.5
8
5–6.5
9.5
6,062 ± 53
–
–
763 (SS)
–
5–1,480 (TSS)
1,769 (TSS)
–
760–800 (TSS)
9,212 (TSS)
10
–
53 (TN)
44 (TN)
4 (NHþ
4 ), 6 (NO3 )
–
38
–
15–40
–
TP
TKN
VSS
TS
pH
BOD5
COD
Waste
type
Table 2
Characteristics of sugar industry wastewaters (composition in mg/L, except for pH)
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
Ca
Cl
References
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
3
contributes organic and inorganic pollutant loadings
to wastewater. Leakages from pumps, pipelines,
centrifuging house also contribute to wastewater
produced. Except this, wastewater is also produced
from boiler blowdown, spray pond overflow [19], and
from condenser cooling water which is discharged as
wastewater when it gets contaminated with cane juice.
Sugar industry wastewater contains wash water
with lost cane juice in various operations, detergents,
bagasse particles, oil and grease used for lubrication,
and lost sugar solids in process. It is characterized by
high concentrations of nutrients, organic and
inorganic contents [20]. Ahmad and Mahmoud [21]
have nicely reported the characteristics of wastewater
from six different sugar industries. Quantity and
composition of sugar industry wastewater depend on
the final products, production processes, equipments
used, and composition variations [22]. Table 2 shows
characteristics of sugar industry wastewater reported
by various authors. It can be seen that there is
large variation in COD (110–12,211.44 mg/L) and BOD
(60–5,103 mg/L) (Table 2). Most of the COD loading
to wastewater is due to the lost cane juice and sugar
solids. The pH and total solids (TS) concentration
varies in the range of 4.5–10 and 6,062 ± 62 mg/L,
respectively [23]; and significant amount of nutrients,
15–40 mg/L of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) [17] and
1.3–12 mg/L of total phosphorous are also found in
sugar industry wastewater. Except this, very high
amount of chlorides (48–3,195 mg/L), ca (CaCO3),
SO4+, Na+, K+, and heavy metals (Zn2+, Ni2+, Cu2+,
Mn2+, Pb2+, Cd2+, Cr3+, and Fe2+) [20] have also been
reported in literature.
3. Treatment methods
Screening, grit removal, flow equalization,
sedimentation, or dissolved air flotation are used to
reduce suspended solids (SS) load from sugar industry wastewater. Biological treatment methods are
applied for the reduction of soluble organic matter
and disinfections [22]. Biological treatment includes
aerobic and anaerobic process. Except biological
methods, physico-chemical methods are also used for
sugar industry wastewater treatment.
3.1. Biological methods
Since, sugar industry wastewater contains mostly
sugars and volatile fatty acids, which are easily biodegradable, therefore all the biological (anaerobic and
aerobic) treatment processes are suitable [22]. Table 3
summarizes the reported literature of biological
treatment for sugar industry wastewater treatment.
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
4
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
3.1.1. Anaerobic treatment
Anaerobic treatment method for concentrated
wastewater, in terms of pollutants (as the sugar
industry wastewater), is widely used method in the
industries. It has several advantages over aerobic processes, which include the lesser energy required;
methane production due to the degradation of organic
matters, which is a source of energy; and lesser sludge
production, which indirectly reduces sludge disposal
costs greatly [24–26]. Anaerobic batch reactor, anaerobic fixed-bed reactors (AFR), up-flow anaerobic fixed
bed (UAFB) reactor, and UASB reactor are generally
used for anaerobic treatment of sugar industry wastewater (Table 3).
Anaerobic and facultative lagoons have been
previously used for years. However, lower removal
efficiency and larger area requirement are the drawbacks of this method [27]. Sanchez Hernnandez and
Travieso Cordoba [28] reported the application of
AFR to treat sugar-mill wastewater with varying
hydraulic retention times (HRT) (0.5, 1.0, 2.0, and
4.0 d). It was found that the increase in HRT increased
organic matter removal and more than 90% of COD
removal was found at 4 d HRT.
Most of the sugar industries have implemented
only solid separation pretreatment with clarifiers/dissolved flotation systems [22]. Effluent discharged from
these industries needs further treatment to avoid
adverse environmental effects in the water receiving
bodies. Some mills utilize this treated wastewater for
irrigation purpose, but clogging problems arise when
the solids are not removed completely. Moreover,
Doke et al. [29] have reported that the plant growth
and crop yield are reduced, and soil health is affected,
if irrigated with wastewater treated by this method.
Therefore, complete removal of pollutants is
necessary. In this regard, the mesophilic UASB reactor
was studied and evaluated by Nacheva et al. [22] for
the treatment of previously treated sugar cane mill
wastewater. They reported more than 90% COD
removal at organic loading rate (OLR) up to 16 kg
COD/m3 d with high biogas production. Finally, they
concluded that the discharge standards in terms of
COD concentration can be found if the UASB reactor
is operated at lower OLR of 4 kg COD/m3 d; but at
higher OLR, an additional biological treatment stage
is needed. Hampannavar and Shivayogimath [17]
have also reported sugar industry wastewater
treatment in a UASB reactor seeded with a
non-granular anaerobically digested sewage sludge,
operated with OLR of 0.5–16 kg COD/m3 d. Optimum
HRT was found to be 6 h giving maximum COD
removal efficiency of 89.4%. In another study [30],
treatment of strong sugar-beet wastewater by an
UAFB was done, and it was reported that the COD
removal efficiencies P90% could be achieved. They
have also reported that by using a suitable packing
material, the system is capable of tolerating very high
organic loading of 10 kg COD/m3 d. Jayanthi and
Sonil
[31] investigated the effectiveness
of
Cyanobacteria for the bioremediation of sugar industry
effluent. It was reported that the color, BOD, COD,
and TDS removal were found to be 39.2, 25.69, 37.9,1
and 48.51%, respectively, in four weeks of treatment.
Waste characteristics, reactor configurations, and
operational parameters all affect the efficiency of
anaerobic digestion [32]. If the waste characteristics
are unsuitable for anaerobic treatment, co-digestion is
Table 3
Reported studies on biological treatment methods for sugar industry wastewaters
Waste
type
Reactor type
% COD
BOD/COD loading
reduction
HRT
Methane yield
(mL/g
CODremoved)
References
BSI and
BP
CSI
SR
CSI
Anaerobic batch reactora
64–87
–
–
236–322
[31]
AFR
Rotating biological contactorb
aerated fixed-film biological
systemsc
UASB
UAFB
UASB
<90
48
74–68%
–
–
0.005–0.120 kg BOD /
m3 d
16 kg COD m3 d1
10 kg COD m3 d1
16 kg COD m3 d1
4 (d)
–
2–8
(h)
–
20 h
6h
–
–
–
[27]
[38]
[47]
355 103 ± 2 103
–
–
[22]
[35]
[17]
CSI
BSI
CSI
a
>90
>90
89%
F/M range (0.51–2.56 g COD/g VSS and 70–89% VS reduction. bPhenol reduction = 63% and color reduction = 55%. cCOD removal
efficiency = 98–89%.
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
one of the alternate used to enhancement the
anaerobic degradation of wastes with different characteristics. Alkaya and Demirer [32] used sugar-beet
industry wastewater and exhausted beet pulp was
subjected as a co-digestion system for anaerobic
biodegradation in batch reactors. About 63.7–87.3% of
COD and 69.6–89.3% of volatile suspended solids
(VSS) removal were observed for 0.51–2.56 g COD/g
VSS F/M range. This shows high biodegradability for
both wastewater and beet pulp. Alkaya and Demirer
[33] conducted experiments for the treatment of
sugar-beet processing wastewater and beet pulp
simultaneously. The waste was first treated in a batchfed continuously mixed anaerobic reactor (FCMR),
then the same reactor was used as an anaerobic
sequential batch reactor (SBR), and the performance
was compared with the methane production. It was
reported that the methane production yield was
increased to 32.2% when the configuration was changed from FCMR to anaerobic SBR. In an another
study, Samaraweera et al. [34] studied on anaerobic
treatment for sugar industry wastewater and reported
that chlorination, addition of macronutrient, and
increase in temperature improved the process in terms
of filaments and lipopolysaccharide disappearance
from the anaerobic tank, decrease in concentration of
the anaerobic clarifier overflow solids, increase in the
concentration of the anaerobic clarifier underflow
solids, increase in alkalinity in the anaerobic tank,
decrease in total volatile fatty acids in the anaerobic
tank, increase in percent methane in the biogas, and
increase in COD loading.
Various steps involved in organic pollutants
degradation by anaerobic process are hydrolysis/
fermentation, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis; and
anaerobes involved are fermentative bacteria, acetogenic bacteria, and methanogens, respectively [35,30].
Alkaya and Demirer [23] studied for maximizing the
hydrolysis and acidification of sugar-beet processing
wastewater and beet pulp to produce volatile fatty acid
using acidogenic anaerobic metabolism in continuously
mixed anaerobic reactors. The important step in this is
to inhibit the methanogenic activity. Optimum HRT of
2 d with 1:1 waste mixing ratio (in terms of COD)
showed highest total volatile fatty acid concentration
3,635 ± 209 mg/L as acetic acid with the acidification
degree of 46.9 ± 2.1%. Bacterial immobilization on solid
supports leads to better cell–liquid separation and
enables the system to hold high count of active
biomass in the reaction system during the anaerobic
treatment [36,37]. Jördening et al. [13] investigated a
system for hydolysis/acidification of sucrose-containing wastewater with the immobilized bacteria on solid
supports. For organics hydrolysis and denitrification
5
process, FBRs were used and nitrification was studied
in an airlift reactor system for sugar industry wastewater. It was concluded that the porous materials retain
higher quantity of biomass for the hydrolysis (up to
55 kg/m3). During nitrification, pumice used as
support material showed best result with 1.2 kg
NH4–N/(m3 d) of nitrification; and the denitrification
rate was found to be four times higher (3.5–5 kg
NO3–N/(m3 d)). In an another study, Phanerochaete
chrysosporium immobilized on polyurethane foam and
scouring web decolourized efficiently the sugar refinery effluent in a long-term repeated batch operation. It
was found that the color, total phenols, and COD were
reduced by 55, 63, and 48%, respectively [38].
3.1.2. Aerobic treatment
Aerobic biological treatment generally involves
degradation of organics in the occurrence of oxygen.
Conventional aerobic treatment includes activated
sludge, trickling filters, aerated lagoons, or a combination of these [39]. Sugar industry wastewaters are
biodegradable except oil and grease which are not
easily degraded by anaerobic processes [40], because
oils produce long-chain fatty acids during the
hydrolysis step which causes retardation in methane
production [41]. Long-chain fatty acids were reported
to be inhibitory to methanogenic bacteria [42].
Ahmad and Mahmoud [21] conducted experiments
in batch reactor to show whether the aerobic treatment
for sugar industry wastewater is acceptable. It was
reported that the aerobic biodegradation of wastewater
is agreeable. It was also reported that the COD reduction can be predicted at given parameters with the
help of relationship suggested by Tucek et al. [43].
Earlier, lagoons were used for sugar industry
wastewater treatment [44,10] because of being an
economic process. But, larger area requirements [10]
and emission of unpleasant and annoying odor during
the treatment process [45] are some of the disadvantages of lagoons. Aerated lagoons were also used in
past, and showed lesser residence time and area
required compared to lagoons, to treat sugar industry
wastewater, but oxygen consumption and HRT were
found to be high, and still large area requirement is
disadvantage [10]. Effluents from Mumias Sugar factory is treated using ponds before discharging into
Nzoia River. To explore the pollution of river due to
this activity, Moses’ et al. [46] examined the samples
for temperature, pH, BOD, COD, TDS, and TSS and
concluded that the values were well above than
discharge limits defined by NEMA and the World
Health Organisation (WHO). Hamoda and Al-Sharekh
[47] examined the performance of a system, aerated
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
6
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
submerged fixed-film (ASFF), in which bio-film was
attached on submerged ceramic tiles with diffused
aeration condition. It was concluded that the ASFF
process is capable of handling severe organic loadings
of 5–120 g BOD/m2 d with minute decrease from 97.9
to 88.5% in BOD removal efficiency and from 73.6 to
67.8% in COD removal efficiency. Nitrification rate
was also decreased but at higher rates.
None of the above studies showed completely/
nearly complete organics removal. Therefore, an additional biological treatment stage is needed. Hybrid
systems of comprising anaerobic and aerobic treatments have been approved capable of giving high
COD removal efficiency with smaller required energy
[5,10,14]. Yang et al. [48] reported a combined anaerobic (UASB) and aerobic (EAFB) treatment system for
effluent from primary treatment of sugarcane mill
wastewater for its application for drip irrigation, and
P99% organics and solids removal were reported at
HRT of 2 d. This treated wastewater hold better water
quality for drip irrigation.
3.2. Physico-chemical methods
Coagulation/flocculation with inorganic coagulants
and adsorption are widely used for the removal of
suspended, colloidal, and dissolved solids (DS) from
wastewaters. Generally, coagulation/flocculation is
used in the primary purification of industrial wastewater (in some cases as secondary and tertiary treatment)
[40]. In coagulation process, insoluble particles and/or
dissolved organic materials aggregate to be larger, and
are removed by sedimentation/filtration stages.
Only one study is reported in open literature by
coagulation with lime and subsequent adsorption with
activated charcoal [20]. BOD and COD removal efficiency was reported to be 96 and 95%, respectively.
Parande et al. [49] studied on COD removal from
sugar industry wastewater using metakaolin, tamarind
nut carbon, and dates nut carbon as adsorbents. Langmuir and Freundlich adsorption isotherms were
reported to fit the experimental data. Studies revealed
that metakaolin was found to give maximum COD
removal efficiency at a dosage of 500 mg/L in a contact time of 180 min at pH = 7.
Electro-chemical (EC) treatment process is an
emerging wastewater treatment technology. EC treatment method involves electro-oxidation, electro-coagulation, and electro-floatation. In electro-oxidation
(EO) treatment, organic materials are oxidized to
carbon dioxide and water or other oxides by
electrochemically generated reactive oxygen and/or
oxidizing agent. Whereas, electro-coagulation process
involves generation of anode material hydroxides
and/or poly hydroxides which remove the organics
by coagulation. Electro-flotation process removes
pollutants with the help of buoyant gases bubbles
generated during electrolysis, which take with them
the pollutant materials to the surface of liquid
body [50].
Capunitan et al. [51] investigated electro-oxidation
and electro-coagulation to treat spent ion-exchangeprocess wastewater from a sugar refinery at different
current values. EO method showed 99.9, 63.1, and
90.5% of decolorization, COD removal, and TSS
removal, respectively, at 5 A in 7 h electrolysis time.
Whereas, in electro-coagulation 71.2, 18.5, and 97.4%
of decolorization, COD removal, and TSS removal
were found, respectively, at 5 A in 8 h electrolysis
time. EO was concluded as the better treatment option
in comparison to electro-coagulation not only in terms
of removal, but also in terms of energy cost.
In another study, Guven et al. [5] conducted EC
experiments to treat simulated sugar-beet factory
wastewater. The effect of various operational variables
such as applied voltage, electrolyte concentration, and
waste concentration was studied for percentage COD
removal and initial COD removal rate. Highest COD
removal and COD initial removal rate were reported
as 86.36% and 43.65 mg/L min, respectively, after 8 h
at the applied voltage of 12 V, 100% waste concentration with 50 g/L NaCl. At optimized set of process
variables and at 100% waste concentration, percentage
COD removal and COD initial removal rate were
found to be 79.66% and 33.69 mg/L min, respectively.
In EC process, the electrode material plays a very
important role in quality of treatment. Asaithambi
and Matheswaran [52] conducted EC experiments to
treat simulated sugar industrial effluent with RuO2coated titanium as an anode and stainless steel as a
cathode. Maximum percentage COD removal was
reported to be 80.74% at 5 A/dm2 current density and
5 g/L of electrolyte concentration in the batch electrochemical reactor.
4. Treated effluent quality, reuse and
recommendations
Form the above study, it can be said that most of
the research works for sugar industry wastewater
treatment have been carried out by anaerobic treatment process. As discussed earlier in Section 3.1.2, oil
and grease are not easily degraded by anaerobic
processes [40] due to the production of long-chain
fatty acids during hydrolysis step, which causes retardation in methane production. Also, anaerobic process
partly degrades nutrients. Moreover, none of the
study reports complete removal of organics (Table 3).
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
In the field of aerobic treatment process, aerated
lagoons, ASFF culture, and mixed culture activated
sludge process have been used for the treatment of
sugar industry wastewater. However, future studies
have to give attention on aerobic SBR treatment,
which is mixed culture activated sludge process and
not previously reported in literature. Various authors
have reported previously the treatment of varieties of
wastewater by aerobic SBR [53–59] and showed that
aerobic SBR give high percentage of organics removal.
Also, in the case of aerobic SBR, smaller area is
needed as compared to other aerobic activated sludge
processes.
7
Anaerobic-aerobic combined system can remove
organics completely from sugar industry wastewater
[48]. Very few studies are available for anaerobic-aerobic combined systems, and more work is needed in
this field.
Because sugar industry wastewater bears high loading of DS and SS, physico-chemical methods like
adsorption and coagulation are well suited for its treatment. However, only one study for coagulation followed by adsorption [20], and another study by
Parande et al. [49], for adsorptive treatment of sugar
industry wastewater, is reported. Moreover, in this
study, mechanism of coagulation/adsorption is lacking.
Table 4
Opportunities and limitations of aerobic, anaerobic, and physico-chemical treatment methods for sugar industry
wastewater
Treatment
method
Opportunities
Limitations
Anaerobic
• Comparatively smaller reactor in size
• Lesser energy is required
• Energy production is possible due to generation of meth-
• Oil and grease are not easily degraded [40]
• Anaerobic process partly degrades organics
• Post-treatment of effluent is often required
ane production during degradation of organic matters
• Excess sludge produced is less
• Up to 90% of VSS removal may be achieved with
co-digestion [32]
• Effluent quality in terms of COD is good [40]
• High COD loading of 16 kg COD m3 d1 is possible
[17,22]
• Nitrogen removal is low, however denitrification rate during treatment may be increased with immobilised bacteria
on solid supports [13]
Aerobic
• Aerated submerged fixed-film (ASFF) process is capable of • Excess sludge produced is high
handling severe organic loadings of 5–120 g BOD/m2 d
• Require larger area [10]
• Excellent effluent quality in terms of COD, BOD, and
• Emission of unpleasant and annoying odor during the
nutrient removal
• Aerobic-SBR has been reported to give high percentage of
•
organics removal for varieties of industrial wastewater
[53–59]. Therefore, it may be a good option for the sugar
industry wastewater treatment
Also, in the case of aerobic SBR smaller area is needed as
compared to other aerobic activated sludge processes
Physico• Coagulation/flocculation, adsorption and electro-chemical
chemical
methods are the various physico-chemical methods
•
•
•
reported for sugar industry wastewater treatment
Combined system of coagulation with adsorption has been
reported to give BOD and COD removal efficiency of 96
and 95%, respectively [20]
Electro-oxidation was shown as the better treatment
option in comparison to electro-coagulation [51]
No generation of secondary pollutants take place in
electro-oxidation method
treatment process [45] using lagoons
• None of the studies available reports complete
removal of organics
• Aerobic SBR treatment systems are more controlling
• Chemical coagulation/flocculation process generates
secondary pollutants
• In electro-coagulation process electrodes are dissolved
•
•
into wastewater due to oxidation, and need to be regularly replaced
A layer of electrode material oxide is deposited over
the cathode leading decrease in efficiency of electrocoagulation process
In the case of electro-coagulation, treated effluent may
be contaminated with electrode material
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
8
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
Kinetic and isotherm parameters for adsorption process
have not been reported, which are important for the
design of any adsorption unit. More study with different types of electrodes is needed for the EC treatment
of sugar industry wastewater. EO is an emerging area
for wastewater treatment, needs to be explored for
sugar industry wastewater. In EO process organic
contamination are oxidised directly at the surface of the
electrode or an oxidising agent is generated electrochemically. Therefore, no generation of secondary
pollutants take place. Various opportunities and
limitations of aerobic, anaerobic, and physico-chemical
treatment methods for sugar industry wastewater are
shown in Table 4.
Imbibition water, cooling water, boiler make-up
water, scrubber feed and scrubber make-up water,
and condenser feed and condenser make-up water are
various water using streams in sugar industries. An
average amount of approximately 11 m3 of water is
required in one day for these activities for one ton of
cane crushed [19]. Therefore, daily 27,500 m3 of water
is needed for a sugar industry having capacity of
2,500 TCD. Treated wastewater may be reused for
different water consuming activities in order to reduce
fresh water load and to achieve the target of zero
water discharge. On other hand, irrigation is one of
the traditional utilization of treated wastewater from
sugar industries. Due to residual pollutants in treated
wastewater, it was reported that plant growth was
affected and crop yield was reduced. Also, affected
soil health has been reported [29].
Membrane assisted treatment such as reverse
osmosis (RO), microfiltration (MF), nanofiltration (NF),
ultrafiltration (UF) are very capable where there is
need to produce high-quality effluent to reuse directly
[40,60]. No work is reported in open literature for the
treatment of sugar industry wastewater using membranes in best of author knowledge. But, sugar industry wastewater bears high load of DS and SS, this will
lead to severe fouling of membranes. Therefore, in
view of producing good quality treated wastewater for
reuse, hybrid system comprising membranes with
aerobic/anaerobic treatment methods and/or physicochemical methods may be promising.
5. Conclusion
Although, generally the anaerobic process is used
for the treatment of sugar industry wastewater, this
method is limited due to the production of long-chain
fatty acids during hydrolysis of oil and grease. Also,
anaerobic processes do not completely remove
nutrients/organics; therefore, anaerobically treated
effluents need further treatment. Aerobic SBR may be
the promising treatment technology for the sugar
industry wastewater, because aerobic SBR has been
reported to give good removal efficiency in terms of
both nutrients and other organics.
Membrane-assisted treatment may be very effective
where there is need to produce high-quality effluent to
reuse. But, sugar industry wastewater bears high load
of DS and SS, this will lead to severe fouling of membranes. Therefore, in view of producing good quality
treated wastewater for reuse, hybrid system comprising
membranes with aerobic/anaerobic treatment methods
and/or physico-chemical methods may be promising.
Abbreviations
BOD
COD
TCD
TS
TKN
AFR
UASB
HRT
OLR
UAFB
TDS
VSS
FCMR
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
SBR
TSS
ASFF
DS
SS
NF
RO
MF
UF
EC
EO
TP
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
biological oxygen demand (mg/L)
chemical oxygen demand (mg/L)
tones crushed per day
total solids
total Kjeldahl nitrogen (mg/L)
anaerobic fixed-bed reactors
up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket
hydraulic retention time
organic loading rate
up flow anaerobic fixed bed
total dissolved solids
volatile suspended solids
batch-fed continuously mixed anaerobic
reactor
sequential batch reactor
total suspended solids
aerated submerged fixed-film
dissolved solids
suspended solids
nanofiltration
reverse osmosis
microfiltration
ultrafiltration
electro-chemical
electro-oxidation
total phosphorous
References
[1] Available
from:
http://www.bharatbook.com/marketresearch-reports/Sugar-Industry-in-India-2012.html (accessed
on 22 March 2013).
[2] Available from: http://www.indiansugar.com/Statics.aspx
(accessed on 22 March 2013).
[3] R.F. Train, T.L. Agee, A. Gywin, R.W. Dellinger, Development Document for Interim Final Effluent Limitations. Guidelines and Proposed New Source Performance Standards for
the Raw Cane Sugar Processing Segment of the Sugar
Processing Point Source Category, EPA-44011-74-002-C,
USEPA, Washington, DC, 1975.
[4] T. Ramjeawon, J. Baguant, Evaluation of critical BOD loadings from Mauritian sugar factories to streams and standards
setting, J. Environ. Manage. 45 (1995) 163–176.
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
[5] G. Güven, A. Perendeci, A. Tanyolac, Electrochemical
treatment of simulated beet sugar factory wastewater, Chem.
Eng. J. 151 (2009) 149–159.
[6] U. Damodharan, M.V. Reddy, Impact of sugar industrial
treated effluent on the growth factor in sugarcane––Cuddalore, India, J. Sustainable Bioenerg. Syst. 2 (2012) 43–48.
[7] P.M. Ayyasamy, R. Yasodha, S. Rajakumar, P. Lakshmanaperumalsamy, P.K.S.M. Rahman, S. Lee, Impact of sugar factory
effluent on the growth and biochemical characteristics of
terrestrial and aquatic plants, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
81 (2008) 449–454.
[8] World Bank, Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook,
Sugar Manufacturing, The World Bank, Washington, DC,
1997.
[9] A. Perendeci, D. Süral, A review of wastewater pollution and
treatment strategies for beet sugar factories in Turkey, Int.
Sugar J. 106(1268) (2004) 437–442.
[10] C. Nahle, Biological purification of sugar factory wastewater
(beet and cane), In: P.W. Van der Poel, H. Schiweck, T.
Schwartz (Eds), Sugar Technology: Beet and Cane Sugar
Manufacture, Verlag Dr, Albert Bartens, KG, Berlin,
pp. 1008–1018, 1998.
[11] C.X. Calero, D.D. Mara, M.R. Pena, Anoxic ponds in the
sugar cane industry: A case study from Colombia, Water Sci.
Technol. 42(10–11) (2000) 67–74.
[12] C. Fonade, J.L. Rols, G. Goma, N. Doubronvine, M. Bermejo,
J.P. Grasa, Improvement of industrial wastewater treatment
by aerated lagoon: Case studies, Water Sci. Technol. 42(5–6)
(2000) 193–200.
[13] H.J. Jördening, K. Hausmann, B. Demuth, M. Zastrutzki, Use
of immobilised bacteria for the wastewater treatment—Examples from the sugar industry, Water Sci. Technol. 53(3) (2006)
9–15.
[14] U. Austermann-Haun, H. Meyer, C.F. Seyfried, K.H.
Rosenwinkel, Full scale experiences with anaerobic/aerobic
treatment plants in the food and beverage industry, Water
Sci. Technol. 40(1) (1999) 305–312.
[15] R. Pastor, L. Abreu, A. Espufia, L. Puigjaner, Minimization of
water consumption and wastewater discharge in the sugar
cane industry, Eur. Symp. Comput. Aided Process Eng. 10
(2000) 907–912.
[16] A. Ingaramo, H. Heluane, M. Colombo, M. Cesca, Water and
wastewater eco-efficiency indicators for the sugar cane industry, J. Cleaner Prod. 17 (2009) 487–495.
[17] U.S. Hampannavar, C.B. Shivayogimath, Anaerobic treatment
of sugar industry wastewater by upflow anaerobic sludge
blanket reactor at ambient temperature, Int. J. Environ. Sci. 1
(4) (2010) 631–639.
[18] Mexican National Water Commission, National Wastewater
Discharge Inventory, Sanitation and Water Quality
Department, Mexico, 2006.
[19] T. Ramjeawon, Cleaner production in Mauritian cane-sugar
factories, J. Cleaner Prod. 8 (2000) 503–510.
[20] M. Khan, U. Kalsoom, T. Mahmood, M. Riaz, A.R. Khan,
Characterization and treatment of industrial effluent from
sugar industry, J. Chem. Soc. Pak. 25(3) (2003) 242–247.
[21] S. Ahmad, T.A. Mahmoud, Wastewater from a sugar refining
industry, Water Res. 16 (1982) 345–355.
[22] P.M. Nacheva, G.M. Chavez, J.M. Chacon, A.C. Chuil, Treatment of cane sugar mill wastewater in an upflow anaerobic
sludge bed reactor, Water Sci. Technol. 60(5) (2009)
1347–1352.
[23] E. Alkaya, G.N. Demirer, Anaerobic acidification of
sugar-beet processing wastes: Effect of operational parameters, Biomass Bioenergy 35 (2011) 32–39.
[24] F.Y. Cakira, M.K. Stenstromb, Greenhouse gas production: A
comparison between aerobic and anaerobic wastewater
treatment technology, Water Res. 39 (2005) 4197–4203.
[25] A. Wheatley, Anaerobic Digestion: A Waste Treatment Technology, Elsevier Applied Science, London, 1990.
9
[26] J.P. Kushwaha, V.C. Srivastava, I.D. Mall, Treatment of dairy
wastewater by inorganic coagulants: Parametric and disposal
studies, Water Res. 44(20) (2010) 5867–5874.
[27] E.P. Sanchez, L. Travieso, Distillery waste water treatment by
high rate anaerobic filters, Biotechnol. Lett. 10(1) (1988)
521–522.
[28] E.P. Sanchez, L. Travieso, Anaerobic treatment of sugar-mill
wastewater in downflow fixed-bed reactors, Bioresour.
Technol. 48 (1994) 179–181.
[29] K.M. Doke, E.M. Khan, J. Rapolu, A. Shaikh, Physico-chemical
analysis of sugar industry effluent and its effect on seed
germination of Vigna angularis, Vigna cylindrical and Sorghum
cernum, Ann. Environ. Sci. 5 (2011) 7–11.
[30] M. Farhadian, M. Borghei, V.V. Umrania, Treatment of sugarbeet wastewater by UAFB bioprocess, Bioresour. Technol. 98
(2007) 3080–3083.
[31] A. Jayanthi, N. Sonil, Treatment of sugar mill effluents with
cyanobacteria, J. Pure Appl. Microbiol. 4(2) (2010) 791–795.
[32] E. Alkaya, G.N. Demirer, Anaerobic mesophilic co-digestion
of sugar-beet processing wastewater and beet-pulp in batch
reactors, Renew. Energy 36 (2011) 971–975.
[33] E. Alkaya, G.N. Demirer, Anaerobic-fed and sequencingbatch treatment of sugar-beet processing wastes: A comparative study, Water Environ. Res. 83(3) (2011) 247–255.
[34] I.S. Samaraweera, T.D. McGillivray, D.L. Rheault, Microbial
issues encountered in wastewater treatment at Moorhead
sugar factory and remedial measures, Zuckerindustrie 134(7)
(2009) 476–485.
[35] W.T. Liu, O.C. Chan, H.H.P. Fang, Characterisation of
microbial community in granular sludge treating brewery
wastewater, Water Res. 36 (2002) 1767–1775.
[36] C. Nicolella, M.C.M. Van Loosdrecht, J.J. Hejnen, Wastewater
treatment with particulate biofilm reactors, J. Biotechnol. 80
(2000) 1–33.
[37] H.J. Jördening, K. Buchholz, High-rate anaerobic wastewater treatment, in: H.J. Jördening, J. Winter, (Eds.), Environmental Biotechnology, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2005, pp.
135–162.
[38] C. Guimarães, P. Porto, R. Oliveira, M. Mota, Continuous
decolourization of a sugar refinery wastewater in a modified
rotating biological contactor with Phanerochaete chrysosporium
immobilized on polyurethane foam disks, Process Biochem.
40 (2005) 535–540.
[39] F. Carta-Escobar, J. Pereda-Marin, P. Alvarez-Mateos, F.
Romero-Guzman, M.M. Duran-Barrantes, F. Barriga-Mateos,
Aerobic purification of dairy wastewater in continuous
regime. Part I: Analysis of the biodegradation process in two
reactor configurations, Biochem. Eng. J. 21 (2004) 183–191.
[40] J.P. Kushwaha, V.C. Srivastava, I.D. Mall, An overview of
various technologies for the treatment of dairy wastewaters,
Crit. Rev. Food Sci. 51(05) (2011) 442–452.
[41] K. Hanaki, T. Matsuo, M. Nagase, Mechanism of inhibition
caused by long-chain fatty acids in anaerobic digestion
process, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 23 (1981) 1591–1610.
[42] I. Koster, Abatement of long-chain fatty acid inhibition of
methanogenic by calcium addition, Biol. Wastes 25 (1987)
51–59.
[43] F. Tuček, J. Chudoba, V. Maděra, Unified basis for design of
biological aerobic treatment processes, Water Res. 5 (1971)
647–680.
[44] C.
Nahle,
Purification
of
wastewater
in
sugar
factories—Anaerobic and aerobic treatment, N-elimination,
Zuckerindustrie 115 (1990) 27–32.
[45] W. Marden, M.F. Branch, W.H. Hodgson, The environment
and York Sugar Factory, in: 25 British Sugar Technical
Conference, Eastbourne, 1980.
[46] A.N. Moses’, N.N. Destaings, N.F. Masinde, J.B. Miima,
Effluent discharge by mumias sugar company in Kenya: An
empirical investigation of the pollution of river Nzoia, Sacha
J. Environ. Stud. 1(1) (2011) 1–30.
Downloaded by [University of Waterloo] at 06:11 11 October 2014
10
J.P. Kushwaha / Desalination and Water Treatment
[47] M.F. Hamoda, H.A. Al-Sharekh, Sugar wastewater treatment
with aerated fixed-film biological systems, Water Sci. Technol.
40 (1999) 313–321.
[48] P.Y. Yang, L.J. Chang, S.A. Whalen, Anaerobic/aerobic
pre-treatment of sugarcane mill wastewater for application of
drip irrigation, Water Sci. Technol. 29(9) (1991) 243–250.
[49] A.K. Parande, K.A. Sivashanmugam, H. Beulah, N. Palaniswamy, Performance evaluation of low cost adsorbents in
reduction of COD in sugar industrial effluent, J. Hazard.
Mater. 168(2–3) (2009) 800–805.
[50] J.P. Kushwaha, V.C. Srivastava, I.D. Mall, Organics removal
from dairy wastewater by electrochemical treatment and
residue disposal, Sep. Purif. Technol. 76(2) (2010) 198–205.
[51] J.A. Capunitan, C.G. Alfafara, V.P. Migo, J.L. Movillon, E.I.
Dizon, M. Matsumura, Decolorization and chemical oxygen
demand (COD) reduction of sugar refinery spent ionexchange-process (SIEP) effluent by electrochemical treatment
methods, Philippine Agric. Sci. 91(4) (2008) 416–425.
[52] P. Asaithambi, M. Matheswaran, Electrochemical treatment of
simulated sugar industrial effluent: Optimization and
modeling using a response surface methodology, Arabian
J. Chem. (In Press), doi: 10.1016/j.arabjc.2011.10.004
[53] M.R. Silva, M.A.Z. Coelho, O.Q.F. Araujo, Minimization of
phenol and ammonia-cal nitrogen in refinery wastewater
employing Biological treatment, Engenharia Térmica, Edição
Especial 2 (2002) 33–37.
[54] F. Kargi, A. Uygur, Nutrient loading rate effects on nutrient
removal in a five-step sequencing batch reactor, Process
Biochem. 39 (2003) 507–512.
[55] D. Kulikowska, E. Klimiuk, A. Drzewicki, BOD5 and COD
removal and sludge production in SBR working with or without anoxic phase, Bioresour. Technol. 98 (2007) 1426–1432.
[56] Y.F. Tsang, F.L. Hua, H. Chua, S.N. Sin, Y.J. Wang, Optimization of biological treatment of paper mill effluent in a
sequencing batch reactor, Biochem. Eng. J. 34 (2007) 193–199.
[57] T. Bae, S. Han, T. Tak, Membrane sequencing batch reactor
system for the treatment of dairy industry wastewater,
Process Biochem. 39 (2003) 221–231.
[58] A. Mohseni-Bandpi, H. Bazari, Biological treatment of dairy
wastewater by sequencing batch reactor, Iran. J. Environ.
Health Sci. Eng. 1(2) (2004) 65–69.
[59] S. Sirianuntapiboon, N. Jeeyachok, R. Larplai, Sequencing
batch reactor biofilm system for treatment of milk industry
wastewater, J. Environ. Manage. 76 (2005) 177–183.
[60] J. Owen, M. Bandi, J.A. Howell, S.J. Churchhouse, Economic
assessment of membrane processes for water and waste water
treatment, J. Membr. Sci. 102 (1995) 77–91.
[61] J. Shayegan, M. Sanai, Land disposal of wastewater from a
beet sugar factory and its effect on soil, Environ. Pollut.
(Series B) I (1980) 61–70.
[62] M. Yetis, U. Gunduz, I. Eroglu, M. Yucel, L. Turker,
Photoproduction of hydrogen from sugar refinery wastewater
by Rhodobacter sphaeroides O.U. 001, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
25 (2000) 1035–1041.
[63] L.Ž. Zver, P. Glavič, Water minimization in process
industries: Case study in beet sugar plant, Conserv. Recycl.
43 (2005) 133–145.